ORHAN PAMUK CASE - CHARGE' TELEGRAPHS USG CONCERNS

C O N F I D E N T I A L ANKARA 005233 SIPDIS ANKARA PASS TO AMCONSUL ADANA E.O. 12958: DECL: 09/07/2015 TAGS: PHUM PGOV TU SUBJECT: ORHAN PAMUK CASE - CHARGE' TELEGRAPHS USG CONCERNS ON FREE SPEECH REF: A. 04 ANKARA 5671 ¶B. 02 ANKARA 6116 Classified By: A/DCM James R. Moore, E.O. 12958, Reasons 1.4 (b) and (d ) ¶1. (C) During a September 7 meeting with Turkish MFA U/S Ali Tuygan, CDA McEldowney raised the freedom of speech court case that has been brought against world-renowned author Orhan Pamuk. Pamuk has been charged with "insulting Turks" for written remarks in which he made reference to the Armenian genocide (see para 4, below). Charge pointed out to U/S Tuygan the absurdity of hauling Pamuk into court for expressing his opinion on the Armenian genocide issue, especially at a time when the FM has, in principle, agreed to make the opening address at an historical conference on the Armenian issue. She stressed that, in the interest of freedom of speech, the GOT should go on the record and say the Pamuk case is simply a bad case. ¶2. (C) Tuygan responded that there is freedom of speech in Turkey, but that the government did not interfere with the independent judiciary. Charge emphasized that no one thought the GOT was behind the case, nor was she asking anyone to interfere with the judiciary - merely to call a spade a spade. This was a bad case, and the GOT should have the freedom to say so. She added that the case had caught the attention of the world media - the Washington Post, the Financial Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Economist. The government, she reiterated, should speak out. ¶3. (U) FM Gul, responding to criticism from European countries on the Pamuk case, stated publicly that he wanted to ensure the world that there was, indeed, freedom of speech in Turkey. People, he said, could express their views freely, as long as they did not incite to violence. No decision, he added, had been made in the case against the author. NTV (MSNBC) carried Gul's remarks. ¶4. (U) Pamuk has been charged under the Penal Code with insulting "Turkishness," a charge which, under the old penal code, carries a sentence of up to one year and, under the new code, up to three. He is scheduled to appear before an Istanbul court on December 16. The charges stem from comments Pamuk made to a Swiss newspaper in 2004 on the Armenian genocide and which became actionable when the Turkish publication "Aktuel" published them in Turkish in a recent issue. Pamuk had written that the Armenian genocide was a delicate topic in Turkey and that "one million Armenians and 30,000 Kurds were killed on this territory." -------------- Comment -------------- ¶5. (C) Although the GOT has adopted much-heralded legal reforms in pursuit of EU membership, it has made only marginal changes to legal restrictions on controversial speech. For example, before the reforms it was illegal to "criticize or insult" the State or Turkishness; now it is only illegal to "insult" (see reftels). This semantic distinction has little meaning to prosecutors, many of whom are ultra-nationalists suspicious of the EU and the reforms, and jealously protective of the state. Unlike in past years, these types of speech cases these days typically end in acquittal, but only after a long, intimidating process. No one should be surprised that Pamuk's comments have drawn the attention of the authorities. Other, less renowned writers and activists continue to be taken to court for controversial speech on a routine basis. MCELDOWNEY